No Thanks, Google, We'll Keep Our Own Data

The Skinny is Keach Hagey's take on the top news of the day and the best of the Internet.

The story was reported by the Wall Street Journal, which discovered that the company is preparing a service that would let users store on its computers essentially all of the files they might keep on their personal computers, such as word processing documents, digital music, video clips and images. Users could access their files via the Internet from different computers and mobile devices when they sign on with a password, and share them online with friends.

Some of the storage space would be free, with additional storage allotments available for a fee. It could be released as early as a few months from now, according to some leaky people who declined to share their names.

"Nope, too much opportunity for corruption," wrote brianbwb, "As a musician who uses computers to record music, I must ask, what will keep Google employees from stealing my ideas and still raw segments of my music and copyright it as their own? Will they be liable if their server loses an important session from one of my clients, or my own?"

Commenter luvcomments agreed. "Why on earth would I elect to put my personal files out on an Internet-based file storage system - especially with Google and the like? There are already programs to allow me to access my computer from anywhere if I feel I can't survive without that. I'm old and I'm crazy but I'm not stupid."

Is Ethanol Just Some Kind Of Corny Joke?

Opinion varied widely in response to Wednesday's column about the growing backlash against corn-based ethanol.

Ethanol proponents won hearts and wallets last year with promises of great U.S. energy independence, fewer greenhouse gases and help for the farm economy, the Wall Street Journal reported. But lately critics - especially those industries hurt when the price of corn rises - blame the fuel for pushing up food prices, question its environmental impact, and dispute how much it really helps reduce the need for oil.

A recent study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development concluded that biofuels "offer a cure [for oil dependence] that's worse than the disease." A National Academy of Sciences study said corn-based ethanol could strain water supplies. The American Lung Association expressed concern about a form of air pollution from burning ethanol in gasoline. And political cartoonists have taken to skewering the biofuel for raising the price of food for the world's poor.

Last month, an outside expert advising the U.N. on the "right to food" labeled the use of food crops to make biofuels "a crime again humanity." The U.N. later distanced itself from the remark, but the impact was clear: ethanol is ticking off a lot of people.

Most of the commenters were in agreement that corn-based ethanol, as it now exists, isn't the alternative energy solution that it was promised to be.

"Add the increased costs of ethanol production and distribution (dollars, energy, pollution, etc.), to the reduced miles per gallon you get with ethanol-added gasoline, to the increased costs of food (from beef to beer) because corn crop production is diverted to ethanol (and away form other crops as well) ... it simply does not add up!" wrote dudzim. "Ethanol is not cost-effective ... unless you are part of the corn-producing industry."

But some were suspicious of the sudden change of heart. "Why did corn-based biofuel lose momentum so quickly?" wrote zuggerjack1. "Some believe there is a well-funded effort to suppress it, mounted by proponents of space-based solar power via microwaves. David Kagan wrote about this in his book 'Sunstroke,' which outlines the campaign to promote the 'power from above.' We need viable eco-friendly fuels to get us through the transition to a completely renewable energy economy, and ethanol fits the ticket. "

Commenter JohnShaft4 wins the prize for the most concise: "I have one word for you...nuclear."

Heated Debate On Global Warming

Debate raged on the comment boards beneath Monday's column about 2007 being the hottest year on record in the Northern Hemisphere.

USA Today reported that this year is on track to be the warmest seen in the Northern Hemisphere in the 127 years that scientists have been keeping track of such things, according to the National Climatic Data Center. In the Southern Hemisphere, it's the ninth warmest.

Skepticism abounded about whether this was due to the actions of mankind.

"Zero factual evidence to support human caused global warming, just a lot of political hype," wrote jowand.

This was countered by commenters such as cofmanaaron, who wrote: "Global warming is supported by the vast majority of credible, relevant scientific data collected over the past 50 years. I can personally vouch for this because I am about to get my Bachelor''s degree in Geology. Simply put, we have evidence that carbon dioxide is intricately linked to Global Temperature over the past 600,000 years and beyond, and that the increase we have seen in temperature and carbon dioxide over the past 100 years is unprecedented in natural history in the rate of increase."

A NOTE TO READERS: The Skinny is available via e-mail. Click here and follow the directions to register to receive it in your inbox each weekday morning.